Figured you might not all have access to this. As both an Apple and a Disney nut, I have mixed feelings about this, but I'm excited at the possibilities:

Quote:

Walt Disney Is In Serious Talks To Acquire PixarStock Deal for Animator Would Make Jobs Top Holder Of Entertainment Giant

January 19, 2006

Walt Disney Co. is in serious discussions to buy Pixar Animation Studios after months in which the two animation giants have been exploring ways to continue their lucrative partnership, according to people familiar with the matter.

In the deal under discussion, Disney would pay a nominal premium to Pixar's current market value of $6.7 billion in a stock transaction that would make Pixar Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs the largest individual shareholder in Disney, according to people familiar with the situation. That would vault Mr. Jobs into an even more influential place in the media world, where he already holds tremendous sway as head of Apple Computer Inc. Yesterday, Apple reported that net income nearly doubled in the latest quarter on huge demand for its iPod music players.

People familiar with the situation caution that the talks are at a sensitive stage and that the outcome isn't certain, noting that other options are possible.

Disney and Pixar have been partners for more than a dozen years under an arrangement in which Disney has distributed and co-financed popular and profitable Pixar movies such as "Toy Story," "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles." Two years ago, however, Mr. Jobs abruptly said he would end the relationship when it expires later this year and seek a new distribution partner, amid acrimony with then-Disney CEO Michael Eisner.

Disney CEO Robert Iger, who took over last October, has made it a priority to get the companies' relationship back on track. Talks have gained momentum in recent months and a resolution could come soon. In a warming of relations, Mr. Iger last fall decided to allow Disney TV shows like "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost" to be made available in a format that could be downloaded and played on Apple's iPod devices.

Both sides accept that Pixar's stock price has a takeover premium built into it after weeks of speculation that Disney might try to take a stake in the company or buy it outright. However, the companies are still haggling over a final price, and any sharp moves in Pixar's share price could easily push the negotiations off course. People familiar with the situation say the two sides could decide on a less-ambitious course, including some form of agreement for Disney to distribute movies that Pixar finances and makes.

An acquisition would give Pixar and Mr. Jobs a way to cash in on the company's unbroken run of blockbuster, computer-animated films. Mr. Jobs would likely join the Disney board, people familiar with the situation say. And Pixar's John Lasseter, the Disney alumnus who directed "Toy Story" and the upcoming "Cars," would take on an expanded role overseeing Disney animated movies. Pixar is now near a point where it needs to decide who will distribute its post-Disney releases, including a film about a rat living in an upmarket Parisian restaurant.

While Disney could face questions about Pixar's high valuation, the deal under discussion would secure for Disney the most successful producer of one of its most important products: animated movies. Disney's own feature animation department is in the midst of a still-uncertain transformation as the company moves from the hand-drawn movies on which it made its name to the computer-animation genre that has overtaken it in recent years. Disney's first entry in the computer-animation business, the recent "Chicken Little," was a modest success.

Since taking over last fall, Mr. Iger has made it clear that animation must be the No. 1 creative priority for the Burbank, Calif., entertainment company. Disney pioneered the genre with classics such as "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" and revived it decades later with a string of new hits such as "The Lion King."

But Disney's traditional hand-drawn films began to suffer commercially when movie audiences took to computer-animated fare such as Pixar's films and DreamWorks Animation SKG's "Shrek" series. Still, Disney was able to benefit from the rise of computer animation through its association with Pixar. An acquisition of Pixar would give Disney a much-needed leg up in restoring its leadership in the business.

An acquisition also would give Disney greater access to a stable of new characters that could be leveraged across the Disney empire in the same way it built franchises around its own characters. It would also ensure that Pixar is involved in making sequels to its movies -- something Disney currently controls -- and give Disney access to cutting-edge technology. For the fiscal year ended last Oct. 1, Disney reported profit of $2.53 billion on revenue of $31.94 billion.

Mr. Jobs has nurtured Pixar from humble roots into a major force in computer-animated films. Mr. Jobs acquired the computer-graphics division of filmmaker George Lucas's Lucasfilm Ltd. for $10 million in 1986 and financed the company, which he renamed Pixar, throughout the late 1980s and early '90s out of his own pocket as it produced short films, commercials and software. At the time, it wasn't clear whether audiences would accept feature-length, computer-animated films.

Then, in 1995, came "Toy Story," the first fully computer-animated feature film. It became the highest grossing movie of the year and started an unbroken string of hits for Pixar. Pixar went public that year, raising $140 million in an initial public offering. For the fiscal year ended Jan. 1, Pixar earned $141.7 million on revenue of $273.5 million.

Mr. Jobs remains the largest shareholder in Pixar, with slightly more than 60 million shares, or 50.6%, according to Pixar's filings with securities regulators last year. At its current share price, Mr. Jobs's stake is worth about $3.44 billion.

Analysts estimate that Pixar's current share price includes a takeover premium of several dollars. In 4 p.m. composite trading yesterday on the Nasdaq Stock Market, Pixar's shares were at $57.26, up 32% since the start of 2005 and up nearly 9% so far this year.

I generally agree, but, as much as it pains me to say it, I hope quality doesn't deteriorate. With Jobs on the board and Lasseter in some position of animation control, I have faith that franchises leading to poor sequels won't be created, but given the current circumstances of Disney animation it's a strong possibility. Awful decisions for this year have already been made (Brother Bear 2, Fox and the Hound 2{for which there is a trailer}, Cinderella 3), and we can only hope this isn't just a money deal. At the same time, this could provide a big boost of not only momentum but confidence in Disney animation and will all intense hope bring back the hand-drawn Beauty and the Beasts, Sleeping Beautys, Cinderellas, etc. and really get this company on top of the entire industry as it was once upon a time. Five year costs will probably total around ten billion for this deal, including the acquisition, which is a whole lot to buy talent. But hey, no way to tell, and best of luck to those making the decisions. Here's to hoping that Toy Story 5 and Nemo 3 don't happen, and that Beauty and the Beast will be topped by Disney themselves in the next few years.

and that Beauty and the Beast will be topped by Disney themselves in the next few years.

I second that. I'm really hoping for original Disney movies of that quality will return someday, and from the looks of their upcoming movies for the next 2+ years....it unfortunately looks like we'll be waiting a while.

PLEASE Disney if you're reading this --- continue to make 2D Hand Drawn animation. I will see your movies in the theaters and buy them, even if everyone else is doing CG. PLEASE.

I'm just not sure whether to hope Pixar should be with Disney or not. The people at Pixar seem to need John full time, and the Disney employees seem like amateur animators. I just don't like the idea of Disney being able to control Pixar. It'll turn into Disney 2 (and it would be another bad sequel).

On the topic of Pixar movie sequels, I don't want anymore. I'd hate to see all of those characters in a bad film.

This is something I've hoped to see since Toy Story. I have to say I'm surprised that it looks like such a strong possibility, but I'm quite pleased that it is. The two belong together and I feel it would mean very good things for both, particularly for Disney, which most needs it. Perhaps it would make room for that traditional animation division we're all demanding too. Jobs as Disney CEO I didn't like... Jobs on the Disney board... that's something I may be able to get 'on board' with too. Long live Disney! Long live Apple!

Well if Disney does buy Pixar, then I would feel better, seeing how Chicken Little ranks as one of the worst animated CGI movies ever down there with Shark Tale and Jimmy Neutron. However my biggest interest, is if Lassater gets more influence, then we could posibly see the remaining Ghibli films (Only Yesterday, Ocean Waves, and all the shorts) on DVD in the US.

I would love to see Toy Story 3 and The Incredibles 2, but I agree that I don't want to see the other sequels as they wouldn't seem nesscessary IMO. But hey, it's Pixar, I'm sure they won't disappoint us with whatever the have for the future.

I actually really enjoy Chicken Little (no Prince Eric, I don't have "bad taste" in movies, I just enjoyed it, okay ) but I must admit it lacked when compared to "Toy Story"(1 and 2), "Monster's Inc." and "The Incredibles".

Disney's first entry in the computer-animation business, the recent "Chicken Little," was a modest success.

Actually, Disney'f first entry in the computer-animation business, Dinosaur, made more at the box office than did Chicken Little - and that was five years ago, not adjsuting for inflation and ticket prices.

Disney's first entry in the computer-animation business, the recent "Chicken Little," was a modest success.

Actually, Disney'f first entry in the computer-animation business, Dinosaur, made more at the box office than did Chicken Little - and that was five years ago, not adjsuting for inflation and ticket prices.

I like Jobs... he had the guts to publicly refer to Disney's DTV sequels as pieces of trash. I like that guy. Of course he was just throwing mudd at Eisner but still....

Come on, Jobs has played everyone and everything like a pro.

First all the "threats to leave Disney" which I was never convinced of at the time - not only would it be almost impossible for Pixar to find a partner offering a match as well as Disney, but without Disney Pixar would virtually be starting from scratch (although admittedly with a big bankroll for a 'start-up' company) which is still a major risk at any time for any company.

Secondly, he uses this 'ruse' to help topple Eisner - not out of concerns about sequels or the decline of handdrawn animation, but simply for the selfish reason he has his eye on the spot himself.

Thirdly, Jobs is not Pixar. Jobs doesn't create the stories, design the characters or voice the roles. He's a money man, plain and simple.

Jobs is not a saint. He can't be. You don't get as far in business as he has by being "nice" - witness his bullying of the publisher of his 'unofficial' but perfectly legal biography, which didn't even say anything that unkind about him!

As for "sequels" he's just as brand and sequel market-led as Eisner ever was - iMac, iPod, iTunes. Of course, being as the PC market in general is failing, he's just as keen as anyone to cash-in on other revenue streams such as his multiple iterations of iPods his only money maker at the moment. And we won't even mention the patents he's tried to register for the iPod, despite being already held by other companies in the first place.

For example, did the world really need an iPod shuffle? Are you telling me that couldn't fit an LCD screen on it?

To me, the iPod story is the story of Jobs' success. A copy of other ideas, done slightly better and with an emphasis placed on simply being attractive.

I like Jobs... he had the guts to publicly refer to Disney's DTV sequels as pieces of trash. I like that guy. Of course he was just throwing mudd at Eisner but still....

Come on, Jobs has played everyone and everything like a pro.

First all the "threats to leave Disney" which I was never convinced of at the time - not only would it be almost impossible for Pixar to find a partner offering a match as well as Disney, but without Disney Pixar would virtually be starting from scratch (although admittedly with a big bankroll for a 'start-up' company) which is still a major risk at any time for any company.

Secondly, he uses this 'ruse' to help topple Eisner - not out of concerns about sequels or the decline of handdrawn animation, but simply for the selfish reason he has his eye on the spot himself.

Thirdly, Jobs is not Pixar. Jobs doesn't create the stories, design the characters or voice the roles. He's a money man, plain and simple.

Jobs is not a saint. He can't be. You don't get as far in business as he has by being "nice" - witness his bullying of the publisher of his 'unofficial' but perfectly legal biography, which didn't even say anything that unkind about him!

As for "sequels" he's just as brand and sequel market-led as Eisner ever was - iMac, iPod, iTunes. Of course, being as the PC market in general is failing, he's just as keen as anyone to cash-in on other revenue streams such as his multiple iterations of iPods his only money maker at the moment. And we won't even mention the patents he's tried to register for the iPod, despite being already held by other companies in the first place.

For example, did the world really need an iPod shuffle? Are you telling me that couldn't fit an LCD screen on it?

To me, the iPod story is the story of Jobs' success. A copy of other ideas, done slightly better and with an emphasis placed on simply being attractive.

I don't like him. Period.

whoaw calm down, I was only saying I liked that he referred to DTV's as trash. Wich they are (eventhough most people don't agree with me on that) I never said he's some sort of creative genius. He's clearly not. In fact, up untill he saw the reactions to Toy Story he was planning on getting rid of Pixar, after TS he changed his mind. He's obviously all about money. Everyone wearing a suit at either Disney or Pixar is only interested in money, from Stainton and Jobs to god knows who else. I miss the days when the artists outnumbered the executives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 8 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum